The cricket teams (which sometimes have been seen the next ‘best’ thing to war itself) will play with the blessings of the establishments.

On 21st February, Jimmy Carter spoke at a peace foundation event held at St Olaf, Minnesota, on the subject of peace and hope. As an introduction a young woman – a junior at a college in the Midwest – spoke about conflict resolution and how it is important in resolution of international conflicts. She made the effort to point to what was “the most dangerous place in the world” – India and Pakistan – and how talks have started in the last few months to defuse the situation. Maybe I should feel proud that a young American actually knew where India and Pakistan are located and even more so since she knew about what was happening there politically. However, I actually felt an emotion that was a mixture of disgust, anger and frustration. Disgust and anger at the condescension of the comment made by an ‘outsider’ pointing to two countries that just cannot seem to behave like mature nations should; and frustration at perhaps the truth in that the comment.

The last few months have seen a flurry of activities aimed at ‘normalization’ of relationships between these two countries. The cricket teams (which sometimes have been seen the next ‘best’ thing to war itself) will play with the blessings of the establishments. Trains and buses will ply between these two countries and planes will fly. There is to be an increased trade between the two neighbors and there is even talk of a possible unified currency in the region.

All this occurs while President Musharraf has clamped down on terrorist groups, especially ones that operate in India. Even more, the Indian government has not attempted to roast the Pakistani establishment on the nuclear proliferation issue in every international forum. Television, film and sport icons seem to be crossing borders quite frequently in the last few months to share their newfound affection. “Low” level meetings have just concluded with a roadmap for peace in place and more secretarial and ministerial level meetings planned for later in summer. Even Indian movies have not indulged in Pakistan bashing in the last month or so.

Yet, I am unwilling to be excited. For one I do not want to be disheartened by another let down. But more so, I ask what is the motivation now? It seems to me that these talks are being driven significantly by external pressures. No one – least of all, the bully of the sandbox – is willing to risk a conflagration at this time. More so, a peaceful South Asia would help sort out the nuclear proliferation issue as well as militancy in that area. And these are significant if not important pieces that the American establishment rather short on foreign policy brownie points could go to election with. Besides, Indian elections are just around the corner. The setup of this peace process and low militant activity in Kashmir will aid BJP at the polls.

Whatever the exact nature of these pressures is, I am concerned that withdrawal of external pressure could result in the collapse of these talks. The climate of peace is rather unstable and I think changes in Pakistani establishment or the end of elections in India might also set off events that could derail this process. What this process needs is increased pressure from within the Indian and Pakistani societies, from civic groups, from policy groups and think tanks and from the media. Fortunately, we have a larger window of time to mobilize such pressure than we have had before. This window is likely to last at least till elections in the US.

It is important that the media from both sides tone down their rhetoric and yet not provide the kind of hype that preceded the Agra meeting. Moreover, the media can play also a significant role in humanizing the neighbor so that a democratic momentum for peace builds up in both these countries. Such an effort could include discussions of commonalities and establishing of connectivity in the lives of both our peoples.

At the same time, it is important that civic society based groups connect between communities and peoples from both these countries in ways that these groups can share concerns, ambitions, values, ethics, cultures, etc. It is important for think tanks to conduct public discussions focusing on the advantages of and the need for peace in the region. Every effort – every trip taken, every website set up, every newsletter – is important not only at this juncture but also to sustain the peace process. For clearly, hostilities bred and maintained over decades will not disappear overnight.